瑞典铁路网轨道更新的边际成本:用数据比较方法

IF 2.2 3区 工程技术 Q2 ECONOMICS
Kristofer Odolinski, Jan-Eric Nilsson, Sherzod Yarmukhamedov, Mattias Haraldsson
{"title":"瑞典铁路网轨道更新的边际成本:用数据比较方法","authors":"Kristofer Odolinski,&nbsp;Jan-Eric Nilsson,&nbsp;Sherzod Yarmukhamedov,&nbsp;Mattias Haraldsson","doi":"10.1016/j.ecotra.2020.100170","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We analyze the differences between corner solution and survival models in estimating the marginal cost of track renewals. Both approaches describe the renewal process in intuitively similar ways but have several methodological distinctions. Using Swedish data for the 1999–2016 period, results suggest the median marginal costs per gross ton-km from corner solution and survival models are SEK 0.0066 and SEK 0.0031, respectively. Since several European countries use information about marginal costs as a basis for track user charges, the choice of estimation method is obviously important. Our conclusion is that the corner solution model is more appropriate in this case, as this method considers the impact traffic has both on the probability of renewal and on the size of the renewal cost. The survival approach does not consider the latter as part of the estimations, which is problematic when we have systematic cost variations due to traffic and infrastructure characteristics.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45761,"journal":{"name":"Economics of Transportation","volume":"22 ","pages":"Article 100170"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.ecotra.2020.100170","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The marginal cost of track renewals in the Swedish railway network: Using data to compare methods\",\"authors\":\"Kristofer Odolinski,&nbsp;Jan-Eric Nilsson,&nbsp;Sherzod Yarmukhamedov,&nbsp;Mattias Haraldsson\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ecotra.2020.100170\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>We analyze the differences between corner solution and survival models in estimating the marginal cost of track renewals. Both approaches describe the renewal process in intuitively similar ways but have several methodological distinctions. Using Swedish data for the 1999–2016 period, results suggest the median marginal costs per gross ton-km from corner solution and survival models are SEK 0.0066 and SEK 0.0031, respectively. Since several European countries use information about marginal costs as a basis for track user charges, the choice of estimation method is obviously important. Our conclusion is that the corner solution model is more appropriate in this case, as this method considers the impact traffic has both on the probability of renewal and on the size of the renewal cost. The survival approach does not consider the latter as part of the estimations, which is problematic when we have systematic cost variations due to traffic and infrastructure characteristics.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45761,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Economics of Transportation\",\"volume\":\"22 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100170\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.ecotra.2020.100170\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Economics of Transportation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212012218301187\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economics of Transportation","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212012218301187","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

我们分析了拐角解和生存模型在估计轨道更新边际成本方面的差异。这两种方法都以直观相似的方式描述更新过程,但在方法上有一些区别。使用瑞典1999-2016年期间的数据,结果表明,拐角解决方案和生存模型的每总吨公里边际成本中位数分别为0.0066瑞典克朗和0.0031瑞典克朗。由于几个欧洲国家使用关于边际费用的资料作为跟踪用户收费的基础,因此选择估算方法显然很重要。我们的结论是角解模型在这种情况下更合适,因为该方法考虑了流量对更新概率和更新成本大小的影响。生存方法不考虑后者作为估计的一部分,这是有问题的,当我们有系统的成本变化,由于交通和基础设施的特点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The marginal cost of track renewals in the Swedish railway network: Using data to compare methods

We analyze the differences between corner solution and survival models in estimating the marginal cost of track renewals. Both approaches describe the renewal process in intuitively similar ways but have several methodological distinctions. Using Swedish data for the 1999–2016 period, results suggest the median marginal costs per gross ton-km from corner solution and survival models are SEK 0.0066 and SEK 0.0031, respectively. Since several European countries use information about marginal costs as a basis for track user charges, the choice of estimation method is obviously important. Our conclusion is that the corner solution model is more appropriate in this case, as this method considers the impact traffic has both on the probability of renewal and on the size of the renewal cost. The survival approach does not consider the latter as part of the estimations, which is problematic when we have systematic cost variations due to traffic and infrastructure characteristics.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
19
审稿时长
69 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信